/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.14624529]

So /sci/ did Tyrannosaur have feathers or not?

[Anonymous No.14624530]

>>14624529
They never existed, god put them there to test our faith.

[Anonymous No.14624532]

[Anonymous No.14624808]

>>14624529
no
for the same reason modern tanks dont have wings like planes do

[Anonymous No.14624821]

>Feathers: yes
>Apex predator: no
>Scavenger: yes
Probably also acted mildy retarded, as most large birds tend to

[Anonymous No.14624865]

>>14624529
Yes. There's 0% chance that Tyrannosaur didn't have feathers when all its relatives did.

[Anonymous No.14625032]

>>14624530
Then why are you still alive?

[Anonymous No.14625040]

>>14624808
God only put wings on planes to test our faith.

[Anonymous No.14625105]

>>14624529
>A 2017 study reviewed known skin impressions of tyrannosaurids, including those of a Tyrannosaurus specimen nicknamed "Wyrex" (BHI 6230) which preserves patches of mosaic scales on the tail, hip, and neck
None on the tail, hips or neck. Realistically the only featherage they could have had is atop the head or the top(back) of the torso.

[Anonymous No.14625650]

>>14624529
No, and E.D.G.E and everyone else that pulls this lying/gaslighting shit deserves to burn.

[Anonymous No.14625655]

>>14624865
You know, except for all the actual physical evidence divorced of retarded speculation that says otherwise.

>>14624532
Is this the tranny shitting up /an/?

[Anonymous No.14625671]

>>14625105
most unfortunate that Wyrex died whilst in the middle of a feather drop.

[Anonymous No.14625686]

>>14625671
Lol

I feel it's important for all the pop sci community to remember the fiery creationism debates and pay attention to the fact that featherfaggots use all the same arguments. People need to remember what Russell's Teapot is. This one thought experiment kills featherfaggots dead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

You can claim that you can sneak in feathers anywhere for all time, even OVER evidence of scales, but this will NEVER BE SCIENCE. Merely the Feathers of the Gaps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

[Anonymous No.14626258]

My money's on them having feathers as juveniles, then losing them as adults. Consider:
-Insulation when they need it most
-Signalling to adults that they're young tyrannosaurs, like crocodiles have
-Once the animal is large and has a lower surface area:volume ratio, the lack of feathers improves the ability to cool itself

[Anonymous No.14626264]

>>14626258
>My money's on them having feathers as juveniles
Gee, I bet you came up with that retarded idea all on your own. Please name even one creature that is born with one integument type, then switches to another. Down and pennaceous feathers are still both feathers.

[Anonymous No.14626271]

>>14626264
insects?

[Anonymous No.14626275]

>>14626271
No. Their exoskeletons are just chitin. The adults and harder parts of juveniles just have more calcium.

[Anonymous No.14626287]

>>14625105
cucklord reads that and goes
>LEL YOU SEE THEY HAD FEATHERS

[Anonymous No.14626306]

>>14626275
>integument type
how are you using "integument type"?

[Anonymous No.14626358]

>>14624529
Yes and they also didn't roar but chirped and made bird song like birds do. It would have been interesting to hear a T Rex tweedle and sing.
>>14624821
This.

[Anonymous No.14626362]

>>14625105
So youre saying they couldve had them like a murica imdian headband huh

[Anonymous No.14626467]

>>14626306
Feathers, scales, hair, bare skin, etc. There is no animal that starts with scales, then gains feathers as it matures. Bare skin is the default setting, obviously, so there are animals that start with bare skin, or that lose hair or feathers or even scales in mutant lizards and revert to bare skin, but nothing transitions from scales to hair or hair to feathers as it matures. That shit don't fly in evolution.

[Anonymous No.14626513]

>>14624529
>Literal who channel (not even checkmarked)
>19K views
some things are too unimportant to get mad over

[Anonymous No.14627678]

>>14626513
Stuff like this always starts small

[Anonymous No.14627737]

>>14624529
>Bothers to make another fucking thread on the subject.

Fuck off you autistic cunt.

[Anonymous No.14627790]

>>14626362
>you are now imagining a tyrannosaurus rain dance
>HOYA! HOYA! HOYA! HOYA!

[Anonymous No.14629546]

>>14624529
>did Tyrannosaur have feathers
Yes
>should Tyrannosaurs in popular fiction have feathers
No

[Anonymous No.14629557]

>>14624865
Mole rats have a hairless species among them. Humans are largely hairless when our close ape relatives are covered in it. Odd, one-off dinos could easily be featherless too.

[Anonymous No.14629568]

>>14626358
their chirps were at frequencies imperceptible to the human ear

[Anonymous No.14629572]

>>14624865
>there's a 0% chance that the african elephant didn't have hair when all of its relatives did

[Anonymous No.14629587]

>>14626264
why not both?

[Anonymous No.14629628]

>>14629587
Because dinosaur scales aren't just fused feathers.

[Anonymous No.14629636]

>>14629628
it's almost like birds already fucking have both feathers and scales.

[Anonymous No.14629646]

>>14629636
Now show me a bird that has scales on its flanks. Should be easy since you all insist so much that's what happened to Dinosaurs. There has never been such a diverse assemblage of feathered animals as there is today. Surely you'll find one!

[Anonymous No.14629657]

>>14629646
>picking an incredibly specific example to refute an argument
refute this, faggot

[Anonymous No.14629658]

oh no

[Anonymous No.14629667]

>>14629657
>>14629658
>Surely the fact these boreal birds have feathers on their feet with scales means that T. rex had feathers QED
Nope. Also, the reason I specify is that you can't do it. You can find a very small number of birds with feathers on their feet, but you can't find any with scales on their stomachs or flanks or forelimbs. Know why? Because once you lose scales, you don't get them back. That's why when birds lose feathers, they just have bald patches, like with ostriches and parrots. And that's why neither T. rex, nor any of its ancestors ever had feathers.

[Anonymous No.14629689]

>>14629667
the t-rex didn't have scales at all, but rather mottled, leathery skin that is easily confused for scales in fossil impressions.

[Anonymous No.14629701]

>>14629689
Is this the newest featherfag cope?

[Anonymous No.14629707]

>>14629701
people who think dinos had no feathers are pathetic copers clinging to antiquidated depictions because they grew up with jurassic park.

[Anonymous No.14629756]

>>14629707
0/100

[Anonymous No.14629779]

>>14626467
Echidna is born with fur and grows spines. You've been BTFO

[Anonymous No.14629785]

>>14629779
The spines of echidnas and even porcupines are just hairs. Same with the plates of pangolins.

[Anonymous No.14629797]

>>14629785
Holy cope

[Anonymous No.14629801]

[Anonymous No.14629811]

>>14629797
Literal fact isn't "cope", retard. Show me a mammal that gains feathers or a lizard that loses hair.

[Anonymous No.14630157]

>>14625032
Anon, humans have more hair per square inch than chimps, its just shorter.

[Anonymous No.14630242]

>>14629785
Feathers are just complex scales

[Anonymous No.14630527]

>>14624529
They obviously had feathers

[Anonymous No.14631182]

>>14630527
why

[Anonymous No.14631519]

>>14630242
Nah. Feathers are a highly evolved structure DERIVED originally from scales. If feathers are scales, so are hairs and mammals have scales.

[Anonymous No.14631520]

>>14631182
Because troll u

[Anonymous No.14631541]

>>14624529
Tyrannosaurus and other allosaur adjacent therapods likely had little to no feathers. While we are now learning that a lot of dinosaurs had feathers, it's an overcorrection to apply that to EVERY dinosaur. We have well preserved remains of Tyrannosaurus, and none of them have remaining bone attatement points for feathers or preserved feathers imprints.

Its likely that Tyrannosaurus wasn't scaley in the lizard sense either, probably a more leathery skin like what you see bird talons/feet made of, which is actually a type of feather structure, so I guess everyone is a little right.

[Anonymous No.14631603]

>>14631541
>a lot of dinosaurs had feathers
The overwhelming majority did not. It's literally just a small section of Jurassic to Cretaceous Theropods.

[Anonymous No.14631605]

>>14631541
>Its likely that Tyrannosaurus wasn't scaley in the lizard sense either, probably a more leathery skin like what you see bird talons/feet made of
You need to drop this. birds have scaly feet.

[Anonymous No.14632285]

>>14624530
Dinosaurs existed during Genesis retard. Behemoth, Leviathan and Ziz were also dinosaurs

[Anonymous No.14632304]

>>14629568
>their chirps were at frequencies imperceptible to the human ear
At what frequencies did T. rex chirp and sing at?

[Anonymous No.14632323]

>>14632285
Ziz??

[Anonymous No.14632330]

>>14629572
It's much worse than that. Elephants DO have hair. What they DON'T have is a loss of hair, replaced by feathers or scales or something else crazy. Where they've lost hair it's just bare skin. The same applies to Dinosaurs. People seem to forget there was never a time when Dinosaurs LOST scales to gain feathers. Their scales evolved INTO feathers. And only a tiny group of Theropods did this, possibly to facilitate flight, but that much is unknown. That's exactly why feathers can NOT be an ancestral dinosaur trait.

[Anonymous No.14632344]

>>14632323
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziz
5 second google search my dude
>Behemoth: Land
>Leviathan: Sea
>Ziz: Sky

[Anonymous No.14633599]

>>14632344
Someday i need to read the bible